doc.: ieee 802.15-03/141r3 submission may 2003 anuj batra et al., texas instrumentsslide 1 project:...

May 2003

Anuj Batra et al., Texas InstrumentsSlide 1

doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

Submission Title: [TI Physical Layer Proposal]Date Submitted: [05 May, 2003]Source: [Anuj Batra, Jaiganesh Balakrishnan, Anand Dabak, et al.] Company [Texas Instruments]

Address [12500 TI Blvd, MS 8649, Dallas, TX 75243]Voice:[214-480-4220], FAX: [972-761-6966], E-Mail:[[email protected]]

Re: [This submission is in response to the IEEE P802.15 Alternate PHY Call for Proposal (doc. 02/372r8) that was issued on January 17, 2003.]

Abstract: [This document describes the TI physical layer proposal for IEEE 802.15 TG3a.]

Purpose: [For discussion by IEEE 802.15 TG3a.]

Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.

Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

TI Physical Layer Proposal:Time-Frequency Interleaved OFDM

Anuj Batra, Jaiganesh Balakrishnan, Anand DabakRanjit Gharpurey, Paul Fontaine, Jerry LinJin-Meng Ho, Simon Lee, Michel Frechette

Steven March, Hirohisa Yamaguchi

Texas Instruments12500 TI Blvd, MS 8649

Dallas, TX

May 5, 2003

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Outline

Overview of OFDM: History, strengths, worldwide compliance.

Optimal operating bandwidth.

Details about Time-Frequency Interleaved OFDM (TFI-OFDM).

Performance Results: Link budget. System performance in multi-path. Simultaneously operating piconets and robustness to coexistence. Complexity.

Summary and Conclusions.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

History of OFDM

OFDM was invented more than 40 years ago.

OFDM has been adopted by several standards: Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) services. IEEE 802.11a/g. IEEE 802.16a. Digital Audio Broadcast (DAB). Digital Terrestrial Television Broadcast:

DVB in Europe and ISDB in Japan.

Because OFDM is suitable for high data-rate systems, it is being considered for the following standards: Fourth generation (4G) wireless services. IEEE 802.11n, IEEE 802.16, and IEEE 802.20.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Strengths of OFDM (1)

OFDM is spectrally efficient: IFFT/FFT operation ensures that sub-carriers do not interfere with one

other. Since the sub-carriers do not interfere, the sub-carrier can be brought

closer together High spectral efficiency.

OFDM has an inherent robustness against narrowband interference: Narrowband interference will affect at most a couple of tones. Do not have to drop the entire band because of narrowband interference. Erase information from the affected tones, since they are now unreliable.

Use FECs to recover the lost information.

IFFT

FFTChannel

H(f)

NarrowbandI nterf erer Tone

I nterf erer

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission


OFDM has excellent robustness in multi-path environments.

1. Cyclic prefix preserves orthogonality between sub-carriers.

IFFT

FFTChannel

H(f)

f

H(f)

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission


OFDM has excellent robustness in multi-path environments:

2. Allows receiver to capture multi-path energy more efficiently.

IFFT Channel

h(t) FFT

#1 #2 #N

h(t)

t

OFDM Symbol

Main Path

Path #2

Path #3

Path #N

FFTintegrates

energy overthe N paths

All paths received within CP(60.6 ns) are collected by FFT

Window forinput to FFT

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Worldwide Compliance (1)

Example: Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts, and Telecommunications in Japan has set aside seven bands for radio-astronomy.1. 3260.0 – 3267.0 MHz (used for line spectral measurement)2. 3332.0 – 3339.0 MHz (same as above)3. 3345.8 – 3352.5 MHz (same as above)4. 4825.0 – 4835.0 MHz (same as above)5. 4950.0 – 4990.0 MHz 6. 4990.0 – 5000.0 MHz7. 6650.0 – 6675.2 MHz

The Ministry has taken measures to ensure that these services will be free of interference.

With OFDM, these services can be protected by turning off the tones near these particular frequencies.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Worldwide Compliance (2) Example: consider a TFI-OFDM systems, which uses 3 channels.

Channel #1: 3168 – 3696 MHz. Channel #2: 3696 – 4224 MHz. Channel #3: 4224 – 4752 MHz.

Only need to protect the first 3 radio astronomy bands. No modifications are required in order to protect the other 4 bands.

Solution: Zero out tones near these frequencies to protect these 3 bands.

Channel #1 - Typical OFDM waveform f Channel #1 - Waveform with J apaneseradioastronomical bands protected.

f

3260 - 3267 MHz3332 - 3339 MHz3345.8 - 3352.5 MHz

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Optimal Operating Bandwidth (1)

Only incremental gains (less than 1 dB) can be realized by using frequencies above 4.8 GHz.

Start with the frequency band from 3.1 to 4.8 GHz: Simplifies the front-end design: LNA and mixers (CMOS

friendly). Avoids the U-NII band entirely.

Quicker time to market! Start withthis band

U-NI I bandUse this

band later

Using the upper band (adding more channels) will increase the multiple piconet performance

As the RF technology improves, can start using the higher band in addition to the lower band.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission


Another reason for avoiding frequencies higher than 4.8 GHz is to simplify the design of off-chip filters. Avoid the U-NII band entirely. Pre-select filter only needs to span the frequencies: 3.1 – 4.8 GHz.

Block diagram of standard pre-select filter:

Pre-select serves 4 purposes: Selects the desired band. Limits out of band noise. Suppresses out-of-band interference (U-NII and ISM). Relaxes the filtering requirements for the remainder of the

analog chain (ex. channel select filter).

TX

RXOff -chip

Pre-selectFilter

TX/ RXSwitch

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission


If the operating BW includes the U-NII band, then interference mitigation strategies have to be included in the receiver design to prevent analog front-end saturation.

Example: Switchable filter architecture. When no U-NII interference is present, use standard pre-select filter. When U-NII interference is present, pass the receive signal through a

different filter (notch filter) that suppresses the entire U-NII band.

TX

RX

TX/ RXSwitch

Off -chip Pre-select Filter

Off -chip Notch Filter

FilterSwitch

FilterSwitch

Problems with this approach: Extra switches more

insertion loss in RX/TX chain. More external components

higher BOM cost. More testing time.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Design of a “relatively” narrowband notch filter is a challenging problem: Need greater than 30 dB of rejection (03/142) over the entire U-NII band to meet

desired criteria. Transition region is ~150 MHz on either side of the band. Example filter design using ideal components (5th-order equal-ripple elliptic):

Problem: Frequencies between 5.05 – 5.95 GHz are no longer usable. Problem: Significant group delay variations at the edge of the notch filter.

May be possible to design 3 individual notch filters that remove just the Lower, Middle U-NII bands, the Upper U-NII band, and the Japanese U-NII band.

Incorporating these off-chip filters into the design will require even more switches even more insertion loss in the RX/TX chains.

Design of a Notch Filter

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Proposed System:

Time Frequency Interleaved OFDM

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Time-Frequency Interleaved OFDM

Basic idea: divide spectrum (3.1 – 4.8 GHz) into 3 sub-bands, where each band is 528 MHz wide.

Information is transmitted using OFDM modulation on each band. OFDM carriers are efficiently generated using an 128-point IFFT/FFT. Internal precision is reduced by limiting constellation size to QPSK.

Information bits are interleaved across all the three bands (3 OFDM symbols) to exploit frequency diversity and provide robustness against multi-path and interference.

60.6 ns cyclic prefix provides robustness against multi-path even in the worst channel environments.

9.5 ns guard interval provides sufficient time for switching between bands.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

TFI-OFDM Physical Layer

Interleave OFDM symbols across sub-bands. Transmitter and receiver process smaller bandwidth signals (528

MHz). Insert a guard interval between OFDM symbols in order to allow

sufficient time to switch between channels. TFI-OFDM needs only a single TX/RX chain for all data rates and all

channel environments.

time

f req(MHz)

3168

3696

4752

4224

312.5 ns

Guard I nterval f orTX/ RX Switching

Time

Period = 937.5 ns

9.5 ns

60.6 nsCyclicPrefi x

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Details of the TFI-OFDM System

*More details about the TFI-OFDM system can be found in the latest version of 03/142.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

TFI-OFDM: Example TX Architecture

Block diagram of an example TX architecture:

Architecture is similar to that of a conventional and proven OFDM system. Can leverage existing OFDM solutions for the development of the TFI-OFDM physical layer.

For a given superframe, the interleaving pattern is specified in the beacon by the PNC. The interleaving pattern is rotated across multiple superframes to mitigate multi-piconet interference.

DACScramblerConvolutional

EncoderPuncturer

BitInterleaver

ConstellationMapping

IFFTInsert Pilots

Add CP & GI

Interleaving Kernel

exp(j2fct)

InputData

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

TFI-OFDM System Parameters

System parameters for rates specifically mentioned in selection criteria document:

Info. Data Rate 110 Mbps 200 Mbps 480 Mbps

Modulation/Constellation

OFDM/QPSK OFDM/QPSK OFDM/QPSK

FFT Size 128 128 128

Coding Rate (K=7) R = 11/32 R = 5/8 R = 3/4

Spreading Rate 2 2 1

Information Tones 50 50 100

Data Tones 100 100 100

Info. Length 242.4 ns 242.4 ns 242.4 ns

Cyclic Prefix 60.6 ns 60.6 ns 60.6 ns

Guard Interval 9.5 ns 9.5 ns 9.5 ns

Symbol Length 312.5 ns 312.5 ns 312.5 ns

Channel Bit Rate 640 Mbps 640 Mbps 640 Mbps

Frequency Band 3168 – 4752 MHz 3168 – 4752 MHz 3168 – 4752 MHz

Multi-path Tolerance 60.6 ns 60.6 ns 60.6 ns

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Simplified TX Analog Section

For rates up to 200 Mb/s, the input to the IFFT is forced to be conjugate symmetric (for spreading gains 2). Output of the IFFT is REAL.

The analog section of TX can be simplified when the input is real: Need to only implement the “I” portion of DAC and mixer. Only requires half the analog die size of a complete “I/Q”

transmitter.

For rates > 200 Mb/s, need to implement full “I/Q” transmitter.

DACScramblerConvolutional

EncoderPuncturer

BitInterleaver

ConstellationMapping

IFFTInsert Pilots

Add CP & GI

Interleaving Kernel

cos(2fct)

InputData

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

More Details on the OFDM Parameters

By using a contiguous set of orthogonal carriers, the transmit spectrum will always occupy a bandwidth greater than 500 MHz.

Total of 128 tones: 100 data tones used to transmit information (constellation: QPSK). 12 pilot tones used for carrier and phase tracking. 10 user-defined pilot tones. Remaining 6 tones including DC are NULL tones.

User-defined pilot tones: Carry no useful information. Energy is placed on these tones to ensure that the spectrum has a

bandwidth greater than 500 MHz. Can trade the amount of energy placed on tones for relaxing

analog filtering specifications. Ultimately, the amount of energy placed on these tones is left to

the implementer. Provides a level of flexibility for the implementer.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Potential Coding Schemes

Several different potential coding schemes: Convolutional codes. Block codes. Concatenated codes – block codes plus convolutional codes. Turbo codes.

There are trade-offs in selecting any of these codes.

The proposal uses convolutional codes, which provides the best trade-off in terms of performance and complexity for a target BER = 10-5.

Advantages Disadvantages

Convolutional Code Well understood. Requires a Viterbi decoder.

Block Code Well understood. Requires a large interleaver (> 10 s).

Concatenated Code At very low BERs (< 10-9), the required Eb/N0 is a lower than that of either convolutional or block codes.

Provides very minor coding gains at target BERs of 10-5. Requires both a Viterbi decoder and a block decoder (larger complexity).

Turbo Code Coding gains near the Shannon limit.

High computational complexity.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Bit Interleaver (1)

Bit interleaving is performed across the bits within an OFDM symbol and across at most three OFDM symbols. Exploits frequency diversity. Randomizes any interference interference looks nearly white. Latency is less than 1 s.

Bit interleaving is performed in three stages: First, 3NCBPS coded bits are grouped together. Second, the coded bits are interleaved using a NCBPS3 block

symbol interleaver. Third, the output bits from 2nd stage are interleaved using a

(NCBPS/10)10 block tone interleaver. The end results is that the 3NCBPS coded bits are interleaved across

3 symbols and within each symbol.

If there are less than 3NCBPS coded bits, which can happen at the end of the header or near the end of a packet, then the second stage of the interleaving process is skipped.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Bit Interleaver (2) Ex: Second stage (symbol interleaver) for a data rate of 110

Mbps

Ex: Third stage (tone interleaver) for a data rate of 110 Mbps

NCBPS 3

Read I n

Read Out

x1 x2 ... x300 x1 x4 ... x298 x2 x5 ... x299 x3 x6 ... x300

300 Coded bits = 3 OFDM symbols 300 Coded bits = 3 OFDM symbols

NCBPS/10 10

Read I n

Read Out

y1 y2 ... y300 y1 y11 ... y291 y2 y12 ... y292 ... y10 y20 ... y300

300 Coded bits = 3 OFDM symbols 300 Coded bits = 3 OFDM symbols

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Channelization

The relationship between fc and channel number nch is

Initially, only the first 3 channels will be defined.

More channels can be added as RF technology improves.

CHNL_ID (nch) Center Frequency (fc)

1 3432 MHz

2 3960 MHz

3 4488 MHz

(MHz) 5282904)( chchc nnf

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Frequency Synthesis (1)

All three frequencies can be generated rapidly using the single-sideband (SSB) generation principle: Cos(1t) Cos(2t) – Sin(1t) Sin(2t) = Cos[(1 + 2)t]

Cos(1t) Sin(2t) + Sin(1t) Cos(2t) = Sin[(1 + 2)t]

Let the VCO center frequency = 4224 MHz

Divide by 4 1056 MHz and Divide by 16 264 MHz

Center frequencies for individual sub-bands: Channel #1: 4224 – 1056 + 264 MHz = 3432 MHz. Channel #2: 4224 – 264 MHz = 3960 MHz. Channel #3: 4224 + 264 MHz = 4488 MHz.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Frequency Synthesis (2) Circuit-level simulation of frequency synthesis:

Nominal switching time = ~2 ns.

Need to use a slightly larger switching time to allow for process and temperature variations.

Switching Time = ~2 nsSwitching Time = ~2 ns

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

TFI-OFDM: PLCP Frame Format

PLCP frame format:

Rates supported: 55, 80, 110, 160, 200, 320, 480 Mb/s. Support for 55, 110, and 200 Mb/s is mandatory.

Preamble length = 9.38 s. Burst preamble length = 4.69 s. For the sake of robustness, the PLCP header, MAC header, HCS, and

tail bits are always sent at the information data rate of 55 Mb/s. PLCP header + MAC header + HCS + tail bits = 2.19 s. Maximum frame payload supported is 4095 bytes.

PLCP Preamble30 OFDM symbols

PHYHeader

MACHeader

HCSFrame Payload

Variable Length: 0 4095 bytesPadBits

TailBits

11.5625 s

55 Mb/s 55, 80, 110, 160, 200, 320, 480 Mb/s

RATE3 bits

Reserved1 bit

LENGTH12 bits

Scrambler Init2 bits

TailBits

FCS

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

PLCP Preamble (1)

Preamble is divided into 3 distinct and separate sections: Packet synchronization sequence (21 symbols). Frame synchronization sequence (3 symbols). Channel estimation sequence (6 symbols).

Packet Sync Sequence21 OFDM symbols

Channel Est Sequence6 OFDM symbols

9.375 s

Frame Sync Sequence3 OFDM symbols

C96 ... C127 C0 C1 ... C127 0 0 0 0 0

PS0 PS1 PS20 FS0 FS1 FS2 CE0 CE1 CE5

C96 ... C127 C0 C1 ... C127 0 0 0 0 0

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

PLCP Preamble (2)

Packet synchronization sequence: Time-domain sequence is a hierarchical sequence. Correlators using these sequences can be implemented efficiently,

i.e., with low power and low complexity. Designed this portion of the preamble to be more robust than the

header.

Frame synchronization sequence: This sequence is 180º out of phase with the packet sync sequence. Provides a clean and detectable boundary between the two

sequences.

Channel estimation sequence: Sequence is used for frequency-domain channel estimation.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Link Budget and Receiver Sensitivity

Assumption: AWGN and 0 dBi gain at TX and RX antennas.

Parameter Value Value Value

Information Data Rate

110 Mb/s 200 Mb/s 480 Mb/s

Average TX Power -10.3 dBm -10.3 dBm -10.3 dBm

Total Path Loss 64.2 dB(@ 10

meters)

56.2 dB(@ 4

meters)

50.2 dB(@ 2

meters)

Average RX Power -74.5 dBm -66.5 dBm -60.5 dBm

Noise Power Per Bit -93.6 dBm -91.0 dBm -87.2 dBm

RX Noise Figure 6.6 dB 6.6 dB 6.6 dB

Total Noise Power -87.0 dBm -84.4 dBm -80.6 dBm

Required Eb/N0 4.0 dB 4.7 dB 4.9 dB

Implementation Loss 2.5 dB 2.5 dB 3.0 dB

Link Margin 6.0 dB 10.7 dB 12.2 dB

RX Sensitivity Level -80.5 dBm -77.2 dBm -72.7 dB

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

System Performance

The distance at which the TFI-OFDM system can achieve a PER of 8% for a 90% link success probability is tabulated below**:

* Includes losses due to front-end filtering, clipping at the DAC, ADC degradation, multi-path degradation, channel estimation, carrier tracking, packet acquisition, etc.

Range* AWGN CM1 CM2 CM3 CM4

110 Mbps 20.5 m 11.5 m 10.9 m 11.6 m 11.0 m

200 Mbps 14.1m 6.9 m 6.3 m 6.8 m 5.0 m

480 Mbps 7.8 m 2.9 m 2.6 m N/A N/A

** Results obtained using new channel model.All results incorporate shadowing.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Simultaneously Operating Piconets (1)

Bandwidth expansion refers to using a signaling bandwidth that is much larger than the information data rate.

Bandwidth expansion can be achieved using any of the following techniques or combination of techniques: Spreading, Time-frequency interleaving, Coding Ex: TFI-OFDM obtains its BW expansion by using all three

techniques.

InformationData Rate

R

EffectiveBandwidth

W

Coding

Spreading

Time-FrequencyInterleaving

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission


However, multi-path and asynchronicity between piconets ensures that spreading sequences and TF codes will never be truly orthogonal.

Can never have perfect isolation between piconets.

Multiple piconet performance is governed by SIR = (Psig/Pint) (W/R). Note that SIR is directly related to bandwidth expansion (W/R).

In realistic multi-path, real-world conditions: “BW expansion is all that matters”.

Systems with same BW expansion have similar multiple piconet capability.

CDMA Systems:

f

f

InterferenceInterference

Data

f

Interferencefrom neighboringpiconet

Down conversionMatched Filter

SpreadingData

f

Multi-band Systems:

Data

f

BandwidthExpansion

fInterferencefrom neighboringpiconet

f

Interference

Down conversionMatched Filter

InterferenceData

f

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission


Assumptions: As specified in 03/031r9, dref = 10.0 meters for all tests.

Single piconet (N= 1) interferer separation distance as a function of the reference and interfering multipath channel environments:

Results for N = 2 and N = 3 interferers as well as FDMA can be found in 03/142r2.

CM1 CM2 CM3 CM4

CM1(dint/dref)

10.5 m(1.05)

9.5 m(0.95)

10.9 m(1.09)

10.4 m(1.04)

CM2(dint/dref)

9.8 m(0.98)

8.9 m(0.89)

10.3 m(1.03)

9.7 m(0.97)

CM3(dint/dref)

9.8 m(0.98)

9.1 m(0.91)

10.3 m(1.03)

9.8 m(0.98)

Test LinkInterferer Link

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Signal Robustness/Coexistence

Assumption: received signal is 6 dB above sensitivity.

Value listed below are the required distance or power level needed to obtain a PER 8% for a 1024 byte packet.

Coexistence with 802.11a/b and Bluetooth is relatively straightforward because these bands are completely avoided.

Interferer Value

IEEE 802.11b @ 2.4 GHz dint 0.2 meter

IEEE 802.11a @ 5.3 GHz dint 0.2 meter

Modulated interferer SIR -3.6 dB

Tone interferer SIR -5.6 dB

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

PHY-SAP Throughput

Assumptions: MPDU (MAC frame body + FCS) length is 1024 bytes. SIFS = 10 s. MIFS = 2 s.

Assumptions: MPDU (MAC frame body + FCS) length is 4024 bytes.

Number of frames

Throughput @ 110 Mb/s



1 85.1 Mb/s 130.4 Mb/s 211.4 Mb/s

5 95.2 Mb/s 155.6 Mb/s 286.4 Mb/s

Number of frames




1 102.3 Mb/s 175.9 Mb/s 362.4 Mb/s

5 105.7 Mb/s 186.3 Mb/s 409.2 Mb/s

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Complexity (1)

Unit manufacturing cost (selected information): Process: CMOS 90 nm technology node in 2005. CMOS 90 nm production will be available from all major SC foundries

by early 2004.

Die Size:

Power consumption (analog plus digital):

Complete Analog*

Complete Digital

90 nm 2.7 mm2 1.9 mm2

130 nm 3.0 mm2 3.8 mm2

TX @ 110 Mb/s

RX @ 110 Mb/s

TX @ 200 Mb/s RX @ 200 Mb/s

Deep Sleep

90 nm 93 mW 155 mW 93 mW 169 mW 15 W

130 nm

117 mW 205 mW 117 mW 227 mW 18 W

* Component area.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Complexity (2)

Manufacturability: Leveraging standard CMOS technology results in a straightforward

development effort. OFDM solutions are mature and have been demonstrated in ADSL

and 802.11a/g solutions.

Time to market: the earliest complete CMOS PHY solutions would be ready for integration is 2005.

Size: Solutions for PC card, compact flash, memory stick, SD memory in 2005.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

FFT/IFFT Complexity Number of complex multipliers and complex adders needed per clock

cycle for a 128 point FFT.

OFDM efficiently captures multi-path energy with lower complexity!

128-point FFT is realizable in current CMOS technology. A technical contribution (03/213) by Roger Bertschmann (SiWorks, Inc.) shows

that they have a 128-point IFFT/FFT core which can be used in a TFI-OFDM system.

The synthesized core has a gate count of approximately 70K gates in a 130 nm TSMC process.

Clock Complex Multipliers / clock cycle

Complex Adders / clock cycle

102.4 MHz 10 28

128 MHz 8 22.4

ADC528MHz

FFT in terms of

complex multiplies

ADC256MHz

4 Finger Rake

+ z 1 + z 2 + z 3

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Comparison of OFDM Technologies

Qualitative comparison between TFI-OFDM and IEEE 802.11a OFDM:

CriteriaTFI-OFDM

Strong AdvantageTFI-OFDM

Slight AdvantageNeutral

802.11aSlight Advantage

802.11aStrong Advantage

PA Power Consumption

ADC Power Consumption

FFT Complexity

Viterbi Decoder Complexity

Channel Select FilterPower Consumption

Channel Select Filter Area

ADC Precision

Digital Precision

Phase Noise Requirements

Sensitivity to Frequency/Timing

Errors

Design of Radio

1. Assumes a 256-point FFT for IEEE 802.11a.2. Assumes a 128-point FFT for IEEE 802.11a.

1 2

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

TFI-OFDMAdvantages (1)

Suitable for CMOS implementation (all components).

Only one transmit and one receive chain at all times, even in the presence of multi-path.

Antenna and pre-select filter are easier to design (can possibly use off-the-shelf components).

Early time to market!

Low cost, low power, and CMOS integrated solution leads to:

Early market adoption!

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

TFI-OFDMAdvantages (2)

Inherent robustness in all the expected multipath environments.

Excellent robustness to ISM, U-NII, and other generic narrowband interference.

Ability to comply with world-wide regulations: Channels and tones can be dynamically turned on/off to comply

with changing regulations.

Coexistence with current and future systems: Channels and tones can be dynamically turned on/off for enhanced

coexistence with the other devices.

Scalability: More channels can be added as the RF technology improves. Digital section complexity/power scales with improvements in

technology nodes (Moore’s Law). Analog section complexity/power scales poorly with technology

node.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Summary

The proposed system is specifically designed to be a low power, low complexity all CMOS solution.

Expected range for 110 Mb/s: 20.5 meters in AWGN, and greater than 11 meters in multipath environments.

Expected power consumption for 110 Mb/s: 90 nm process: 93 mW (TX), 155 mW (RX), 15 W (deep sleep). 130 nm process: 117 mW (TX), 205 mW (RX), 18 W (deep sleep).

TFI-OFDM is coexistence friendly and complies with world-wide regulations.

PHY solution are expected to be ready for integration in 2005.

TFI-OFDM offers the best trade-off between the various system parameters.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Backup slides

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Self-evaluation Matrix (1) REF.

IMPORTANCE LEVEL

PROPOSER RESPONSE

Unit Manufacturing Complexity (UMC)

3.1 B +

Signal Robustness Interference And Susceptibility 3.2.2

A +

Coexistence 3.2.3 A +

Technical Feasibility

Manufacturability 3.3.1 A +

Time To Market 3.3.2 A +

Regulatory Impact 3.3.3 A +

Scalability (i.e. Payload Bit Rate/Data Throughput, Channelization – physical or coded, Complexity, Range, Frequencies of Operation, Bandwidth of Operation, Power Consumption)

3.4 A

+

Location Awareness 3.5 C 0

CRITERIA REF.

IMPORTANCE LEVEL

PROPOSER RESPONSE

MAC Enhancements And Modifications

4.1. C +

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Self-evaluation Matrix (2)CRITERIA REF.

IMPORTANCE LEVEL

PROPOSER RESPONSE

Size And Form Factor 5.1 B

+

PHY-SAP Payload Bit Rate & Data Throughput Payload Bit Rate 5.2.1

A +

Packet Overhead 5.2.2 A +

PHY-SAP Throughput 5.2.3 A +

Simultaneously Operating Piconets

5.3 A +

Signal Acquisition 5.4 A +

System Performance 5.5 A +

Link Budget 5.6 A +

Sensitivity 5.7 A +

Power Management Modes 5.8 B +

Power Consumption 5.9 A +

Antenna Practicality 5.10 B +

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Convolutional Encoder

Assume a mother convolutional code of R = 1/3, K = 7. Having a single mother code simplifies the implementation.

Generator polynomial: g0 = [1338], g1 = [1458], g2 = [1758].

Higher rate codes are achieved by puncturing the mother code. Puncturing patterns are specified in latest revision of 03/142.

D D D D D DI nputData

Output Data A

Output Data B

Output Data C

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

TFI-OFDM: Example RX Architecture

Block diagram of an example RX architecture:

Architecture is similar to that of a conventional and proven OFDM system. Can leverage existing OFDM solutions for the development of the TFI-OFDM physical layer.

Pre-SelectFilter

LNA

sin(2fct)

cos(2fct)

Syn

chro

niza

tion

Rem

ove

CP

FFT

FEQ

Rem

ove

Pilo

ts

Vit

erbi

Dec

oder

De-

scra

mble

r

AGC

CarrierPhaseand

TimeTracking

De-

Inte

rlea

ver

I

Q

LPF

LPF

VGA

VGA

ADC

ADC

OutputData

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Simulation Parameters

Assumptions: System as defined in 03/142. Clipping at the DAC (PAR = 9 dB). Finite precision ADC (4 bits @ 110/200 Mbps).

Degradations incorporated: Front-end filtering. Multi-path degradation. Clipping at the DAC. Finite precision ADC. Crystal frequency mismatch (20 ppm @ TX, 20 ppm @ RX). Channel estimation. Carrier offset recovery. Carrier tracking. Packet acquisition.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

System Performance (1)

PER as a function of distance and information data rate in an AWGN and CM2 environment* (90% link success probability).

* Results obtained using new channel model.All results incorporate shadowing.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

System Performance (2)

PER as a function of distance and information data rate in an CM3 and CM4 environment* (90% link success probability).

* Results obtained using new channel model.All results incorporate shadowing.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Signal Acquisition

Preamble was designed to be robust and work at 3 dB below sensitivity for 55 Mbps.

Prob. of false detect (Pf) = 6.2 x 10-

4.

The results for prob. of miss detect (Pm) vs. distance @ 110 Mb/s was averaged over 500 noise realization for 100 channels in each channel environment:

The start of a valid OFDM transmission at a receiver sensitivity level -83.5 dBm shall cause CCA to indicate busy with a probability > 90% in 4.69 s.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Is Cyclic Prefix (CP) Sufficient?

For a data rate of 110 Mb/s, studied effect of CP length on performance.

Curves were averaged over 100 realizations of CM3.

For a CP length of 60 ns, the average loss in collected multi-path energy is approx. 0.1 dB.

Inter-carrier interference (ICI) due to multi-path outside the CP is approximately 24 dB below the signal.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Peak-to-Average Ratio (PAR) for TFI-OFDM

Average TX Power = –9.5 dBm (this value includes pilot tones)

PAR of 9 dB results in: Impact of clipping at TX DAC is

negligible. Results in a performance loss of

less than 0.1 dB in AWGN. Results in a performance loss of

less than 0.1 dB in all multipath environments.

Peak TX power 0 dBm.

Implication: TX can be built completely in CMOS.

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

MAC Enhancements

Add a time-frequency interleaving information element (TFI IE) to the beacon: TFI IE contains parameters for synchronizing DEVs using TFI-OFDM PHY. IE payload contains Interleaving Sequence (IS) and Rotation Sequence (RS)

parameters.

IS field specifies the current pattern for interleaving over the channels. RS field specifies the current rotation pattern for the interleaving sequences.

PNC updates the IS parameter in the beacon for each superframe according to the RS parameter. DEVs that miss the beacon can determine the IS based on the definition of the RS

in the last beacon received.

PNC may change the RS parameter by applying the piconet parameter change procedure specified in the IEEE 802.15.3 draft standard. Reuse “New Channel Index” as “New Channel Index/RS Number”.

Octets: 1 1 1 1

Interleaving Sequence Rotation SequenceElement ID Length

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

MAC Controlled Rules for Interleaving

Piconet #1: Ex: RS_2 = {IS_2, IS_3, IS_1, IS_3, IS_2, IS_1, Repeat} Ex: IS_1 = {Chan_2, Chan_1, Chan_3, Chan_1, Chan_2, Chan_3, Repeat}

Piconet #2: Ex: RS_2 = {IS_1, IS_3, IS_2, IS_1, IS_2, IS_3, Repeat}

Bea

con

- T

FI

IE(I

S_2

, RS

_2)

Bea

con

- T

FI

IE(I

S_3

, RS

_2)

Bea

con

- T

FI

IE(I

S_1

, RS

_2)

Bea

con

- T

FI

IE(I

S_3

, RS

_2)

IS_2 forall non-beacon

frames


frames


frames


frames

Superframe Duration Superframe Duration Superframe Duration Superframe Duration

PLME-SET.request(PHYPIB_CurrentIS,PHYPIB_IS_3)

PLME-SET.confirm(ResultCode,PHYPIB_CurrentIS)







May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

InnerCode

Encoder

InnerCode

Decoder

OuterCode

Encoder

OuterCode

Decoder

AWGN

xk xk^

Coding Gains for Concatenated Codes (1)

Consider a system that uses both an inner and an outer code.

Example: Outer code: R = ½, K = 7 Convolutional Code (coding gain = Gouter) Inner code: 16-BOK based on Walsh functions (coding gain = Ginner)

Let Goverall = coding gain of overall system.

Does Goverall = Ginner + Gouter at a given BER? Short answer is NO.

See example on next slide.

Lynn Miller

have all black bullets come up at saem time and red text come up aftterwards

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

2.2 dB

5.3 dB

5.4 dB

7.5 dB?

Coding Gains for Concatenated Codes (2)

Simulated the coding gains for 16-BOK, Convolutional Code, 16-BOK + Convolutional Code with and without an interleaver.

Assumption: Coding gain is measured at a BER = 10–5.

Assumption: Independent decoders for both the inner and outer codes.

Gains: Ginner = 2.2 dB, Gouter = 5.3 dB.

Common mistake is to expect an overall coding gain of 7.5 dB.

In reality, Goverall = 5.4 dB when there is an interleaver present between the two codes.

Lynn Miller

have all black bullets come up at saem time and red text come up aftterwards

May 2003


doc.: IEEE 802.15-03/141r3

Submission

Simultaneously Operating Piconets

Total effective bandwidth (TEB) is given as:

Bandwidth Expansion Factor (BEF) is defined as follows:

Interference suppression capability is directly related to the BEF.

In terms of supporting multiple uncoordinated piconets, all that matters is a systems ability to suppress interference.

Systems that have the same BEF have similar multiple piconet capability.

OFDM-TFIfor 9rate Data

bandwidth effective TotalBEF

systemscarrier -multiFor duration symbol

tonesdata of #bands of #

systemscarrier -singleFor )BW dB-3()bands of #(TEB

doc.: ieee 802.15-03/141r3 submission may 2003 anuj batra et al., texas instrumentsslide 1 project:...

Documents